Yes, but profit coming from different sources, which require different methods.
Microsoft is also an operating system company
I always equate OS to software. They have had to decide which is a bigger part of their potential revenue, and they've certainly made bone-head decisions along the way.
At the same time, when I was a Windows Phone user a few years ago, I found it telling that the Photosynth app was created for iOS long before it was created for Windows Phone.
It all depends on what part of Microsoft you're talking about, but some parts seem to think that exclusives are the way to greater software sales. I think the current CEO is putting an end to that line of thinking.
Google is an advertising company. They make money from getting the advertising targets (you) to use their services, and charge the advertisers for access to you.
They're not going to make money off Android directly, it is just a way to get people on their platform.
This is why Google still makes iOS and Windows Phone applications. They just care that you're using their platform, regardless of how.
Apple is a hardware company.They make money from selling phones, and increasingly off of their app stores, but obviously not enough to open their app store to Google.
This is why you DON'T see iTunes, Facetime, or iMessage for Android. Their goal is to sell devices.
Microsoft is a software company. They make money off selling software, so they will, like Google, try to make their software available on as many platforms as they can. They, also like Google, care less about the phone sales and more about getting you as a loyal user of their products.
Unlike Google, Microsoft users are their customers.
Whenever people compare these three companies, they need to look at the core of who these companies are.
I'm not claiming one is better than the other, and in fact I use all three daily.
They just have different motivations for playing on the same playground.
It is somewhat like 3 kids all playing baseball together, but one is playing to be a pro baseball player, another is playing to have fun, and another is playing to impress a girl.
You can't compare the 3 kids to each other and say one is doing better than another, because each is measuring their success a different way.
Why would anyone use those? There's no discount.
Using a Starbucks card counts towards a free drink or food item after 12 uses.
There is no minimum amount on what counts, as long as it is a drink or food item, and there is no max on what you can redeem it for, again as long as it is a drink or food item.
I have used this to great success by getting a $1.50 brew coffee, put in my own mug (-$0.10), and free refills while using their WiFi for a few hours.
Every 2 weeks, I would get a free treat, a 5-6 shot "candy coffee" with whip cream, caramel, etc... That would normally be $7-$8, but was free with that card.
For me, that was enough that I saved the money and calories of skipping those candy drinks most of the time, knowing I'd have it again soon enough.
I remember getting a request for a cluster that was proposed to be split between a midwest USA site and London. Conversation was something like this (not exact numbers, but I did do the math at the time):
PHB: We need less than 50ms latency.
Me: Can't be done. We're at around 120ms right now with 10ms jitter using VPN.
PHB: What about MPLS?
Me: That might get us to 115ms with 5ms jitter.
PHB: Well, we have to come up with a solution. What else can we do?
Me: Slap Einstein? This is a physics problem, not an IT problem.
PHB: This is OUR problem to solve.
Me: Ok, if we buy our own glass, lay it in a straight line between us and London, which also includes some sort of housing for it that I don't know exists that would prevent issues with freezing/melting/icebergs, we'd end up with 72 ms.
PHB: So there really isn't anything we can do...*starts walking away*
Me: Hold on! I have another idea! We can tunnel through the earth, and skip the water issue if we can come up with a new type of shielding that can withstand tectonic forces and heat. That will allow us to get to 55 ms since we're not dealing with the curvature of the earth! Will that work?
The speed of photons is not a meaningful part of that latency.
It is if you're trying to siphon money from the stock market without adding value.
For the general internet, though, it is useless.
Why just steal a package of unknown value when you can stuff the drone into a steel box and get a pile of expensive parts along with whatever bonus you find in the package being delivered.
Perhaps it will stream video live back to the Amazon Cloud, and after a few people are busted doing this, everyone else will get the memo that it is a bad idea.
They may also embed a small GPS/cellular transponder into a rather small part of the drone, so unless you systematically pulverize every part of it inside of a Faraday cage, your location will be pinged to law enforcement.
Finally, the whole point of this is that you're paying extra to get the stuff RIGHT NOW instead of tomorrow or later today. The chances of someone stealing my drone package that I'm waiting for seems lower than the 2-day package that sits on my porch all day.
THAT is the main source of my derision for the device. If you want a smart watch fine, but have the sense to buy one that works with any phone.
Which is why I got a sub-$100 Pebble after reading the price and specs of the Apple watch.
It doesn't integrate as well into Apple iOS, but I can leave my phone in my pocket while cycling and see my data from my cycling GPS app, see notices from the phone, etc.
Plus, battery life of almost a week, e-ink screen that is gets easier to read in direct sunlight, and actually waterproof.
No, there are 23 channels.
In the USA, excluding DFS, it's 9.
DFS channels are all secondary to other uses, so you can't plan on them.
Ohhhh, multicast video over LED? Streaming the live CCTV stream at whatever event you're at to any handheld without impacting your Wifi spectrum!
Everyone that leaves the main area to get a beer or dispose of one can still stay connected to the event.
That's because they insist on using the small (3-4 channels) and crowded 2.4GHz band.
First off, there are still a LOT of devices without 5ghz support. I know many companies that are still ordering 2.4ghz-only laptops in 2015. Seriously. 2.4ghz is going to die as slow of a death as IPv4.
Second, 5ghz gives you 9 channels instead of 3, true. In a room that can have 500 people, though, that is still 55 people per channel. That is slow.
First off, this has nothing to do with Wifi in your home or office where there is little line of sight and lots of RF-soaking walls to help isolate your access points.
When you're dealing with a large area with dense users (airport, lecture hall, arena, etc), wireless becomes really hard. The shared medium and limited number of non-overlapping channels becomes a real issue.
You can get directional antennas to try to isolate the overlapping channels, but there is reflection to deal with. It is a constant battle of too little power to work, and too much power and you are interfering with another access point.
Are you really going to run Cat6 all over the lecture hall or airport? To everyone's handheld device? No.
LED lights are far more directional, so even though you still have a shared medium, you're not dealing with the same issues at gigahertz RF.
This is a niche, but a very important one.
I don't quite get that objection. It's not like it's particularly new. Magazines and newspapers were subscription-based and full of ads, for instance.
So...how's that been working out for them lately?
It seems that both print and traditional pay TV have been increasing both prices and % of ad content for a long time. People are starting to reject these levels, and younger people that are not yet used to paying for it are rejecting it quicker.
Meanwhile, the companies have grown to expect this level of income, so they're not quick to adapt.
Evolve or die.
There is no INTERNAL_IP6_ADDRESS, there is just an IP6_ADDRESS.
Actually, INTERNAL_IP6_ADDRESS is the link-local address (fe80). All of your communications on your local subnet use that.
There is also the RFC 1918 (10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x, 172.16-31.x.x) type addressing companies can do if they want a private non-internet-routable range: Unique Local Addresses. They start with fc07. Most people won't have these at home, but I expect many businesses to use them for things like internal routers. You don't want to have to re-ip those if you change ISPs.
The really cool part is that both the link-local and the ULA can co-exist with your global IPv6 public address!
The biggest issue for home networking is the lack of management of the router/firewall itself. You can't port forward (no config UI)
I've noticed several SOHO routers apply the IPv4 rules to your IPv6 connections. So, if you allow RDP to 192.168.1.2, it will also allow RDP to the IPv6 global address that 192.168.1.2 has. Yes, having unique ACLs for both would be nice, but for most users, this is an acceptable solution.
What would it take to build something that you can point in a direction and go, come back, repeat?
A small, portable power source that would be several orders of magnitude more powerful than what we have today, for one.
Get working on that Mr. Fusion and I think we'll have something more to your liking.